Diagnostic performance of MRI for assessing axillary lymph node status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

This systematic review examined the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for assessing axillary lymph node status (ALNS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer patients. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies and used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess methodological quality of eligible studies. We used STATA version 12.0 to perform data pooling, heterogeneity testing, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis. For the 21 enrolled studies, including 2875 patients, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were respectively 0.63 (95% CI: 0.53-0.72), 0.75 (95% CI: 0.68-0.81), 2.52 (95% CI: 1.98-3.19), 0.50 (95% CI: 0.39-0.63), and 5.08 (95% CI: 3.38-7.63). The AUC was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.72-0.79). I² values of sensitivity (I² = 94.41%) and specificity (I² = 88.97%) were both > 50%. For the initial positive ALN patients, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.53-0.75) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.64-0.82), respectively. Sensitivity analyses by focusing on studies with MRI performed post-NAC, studies using DCE-MRI, or studies with low risk of bias showed similar results to the primary analyses. MRI may have suboptimal diagnostic value in assessing ALNS after NAC for breast cancer patients. Due to the inconsistency of NAC regimens, the variability of axillary surgery, and the lack of time interval between MRI and surgery, further studies are needed to confirm our findings. Our study provided the diagnostic value of MRI in assessing axillary lymph node status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients. • MRI may have suboptimal diagnostic value in assessing axillary lymph node status after NAC for general breast cancer patients. • The initial axillary lymph node status has little impact on the diagnostic efficacy of MRI. • The substantial heterogeneity among studies highlights the need for further studies to provide more high-quality evidence in this field.